HMRC mistakes are getting worse

dunce
iStock_EyeJoy_dunce
Share this content
Tags

Missing correspondence, incorrect PAYE codes, inaccurate tax calculations, and sometimes simply ridiculous statements are made by HMRC officers.

Seen it all  

AccountingWEB members have seen it all in their time, but some people believe that HMRC’s errors are becoming more frequent, and increasingly exhibit a worrying lack of knowledge about the tax system.

Is this your experience?    

Stunning letter

An example of stunning ignorance of the tax system was provided in a letter from the PAYE and self assessment section of HMRC. Sue Christensen tells the full story in her blog of how her client had class 1 NIC deducted from her self-employed earnings as a dancer, which removed the requirement for her to pay class 4 NIC. But the HMRC officer clearly didn't understand that point.

We have reproduced the full text of that letter, including all the spelling mistakes,but excluded the HMRC officer’s name to spare him any further embarrassment.

"Dear Sir or Madam

Miss F [client’s name redacted]

Thank you for your letter of 14/03/2017

Calls 4 NIC are not national insurance contributions. They do not count all for benefit purposes. They are an additional form of tax paid on self-employed profits.

We do not tax account of class 1 national insurance contributions in tax returns. There is no box where they can be recorded. The class 4 charges to you client for the 13/14 tax year are therefore due and payable. As mentioned they are just extra tax he has to pay on his self-employed profits

Yours faithfully"

This case was eventually resolved when Ruth Owen, (then HMRC director general for customer services) was contacted and had the file transferred to an experienced officer.

Misleading tax calculations

A taxpayer who has already submitted his SA tax return for 2016/17 will receive a statement showing the balancing amount of tax due for 2016/17, payable by 31 January 2018. An AccountingWEB member sent me a copy of such a statement received by his client.

The statement correctly shows the amount due for 2016/17, and the payments on account for 2017/18, payable by 31 January 2018 and 31 July 2018. However, those payments are referred to as payments on account for 2016/17. This substitution of “2016/17” for “2017/18” is clearly an error, but it doesn’t help the taxpayer understand his tax position.  

Is this confusing tax statement a system error or just a one-off? Have you seen similar mistakes on the 2016/17 tax statements?

Bad advice by phone

The HMRC helpline can be the unhelpful line if you ask anything slightly complicated. Here is a story from Stuart Jones, a long-term AccountingWEB member:

“I called HMRC to ask how to submit a late claim for the employment allowance. I was told employment allowance wasn’t available for one-man companies in 2014/15 and 2015/16.”

This advice is wrong, as the restriction in the employment allowance for one-man companies was introduced on 6 April 2016, although HMRC is still arguing about the rules, as I highlighted back in April 2016.

Another member recounted: “I phoned HMRC and asked them to stop issuing PAYE reminders for a company which had been dissolved in 2015, and the HMRC operative asked if it was still trading.”

Inaccurate PAYE codes

Nonsensical PAYE codes have been a feature of the tax system for years, but some accountants think the volume of crazy codes has escalated this year. Jill Crawley has seen a spate of OT codes issued. In this case, the OT codes may have been triggered by change of payroll software from 6 April 2017.  

Examples of more inglorious PAYE code errors were discussed in this thread: HMRC fixing PAYE.

Lost letters and returns

HMRC is always quick to punish the taxpayer if the SA tax return does not reach HMRC’s offices on time, but its own post handling system leaves much to be desired.

This is a typical story: “Last week a nurse I know said she had received a late return penalty notice from HMRC and she didn't know why. I checked that she wasn't within self-assessment. I told her to phone HMRC and ask them to cancel the penalty and withdraw the tax return. She told me yesterday that HMRC had said there was something wrong with her tax so they'd issued a tax return but she said never received it.”

Do you have examples of outrageous HMRC errors? Please share your story below.

About Rebecca Cave

Consulting tax editor for Accountingweb.co.uk. I also co-author several annual tax books for Bloomsbury Professional and write newsletters for other publishers.

Replies

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By Chris Mann
24th May 2017 11:28

Agent dedicated (help) line
I mentioned this story before, as it occurred.
I contacted the dedicated line and, imagined that on the call being taken, I'd be asked for either; the client's UTR, or national insurance number.
"Tom" answered the call and immediately asked me what the theme of my call was?
I assumed that Tom wasn't reading from the screen but, again, he asked me for the chief reason for my call. I queried this to which Tom replied "we're trying something different" and, "did I have an issue with that".
I closed the call with the comment, "I'll come back to you later"
On phoning the dedicated line, almost immediately, I was met with the usual security questions; client's UTR or NINO!

Although an isolated incident, time and time again, there seems to be a growing inconsistency in the; quality of officers and, the style (manner) of how the enquiry is dealt with.

This is particularly relevant when dealing with complaints. I had a fabulous experience from an (Irish) officer in Cardiff, who shared the same surname and, was efficiency and politeness personified. In the same week, another lady officer must have been related to Cruella De Vil!

All of this of course overlooks how HMRC interpret, "guidelines" which are supposed to represent legislation. One shining example is that the guidelines suggest that Directors must complete a self-assessment return. Really?

Over my 44 years of "Revenue" experience I'm saddened that this once respected Government agency has fallen foul to; inconsistency, an obvious lack of knowledge (in some areas) and, an arrogance in the hierarchy beyond belief. I can't imagine that job satisfaction is a description regularly used amongst the staff?

The worrying thing is, I don't see any improvement on the horizon. After all, as MTD comes across the horizon, who really knows what to expect? How often do members on here report interruptions in access to online filing?

Do any of us have any "fixes"?

Thanks (3)
avatar
to Chris Mann
26th May 2017 10:07

"as MTD comes across the horizon, who really knows what to expect?"

We all know EXACTLY what to expect !!!

Thanks (8)
avatar
24th May 2017 12:42

we have a corporate client with a 30th April year end. HMRC are chasing a CT600 for the period ending 5th April 2015 despite us having filed a CT600 for the correct period. HMRC are denying that any CT600's have been filed for this company despite us having sent them a copy of the CT600 filed together with the online filing confirmation produced by our software AND the email from the government gateway confirming the CT600 had been accepted.

HMRC are still chasing over £5,000 in tax and penalties that are just not due, actually this particular client paid his Corporation Tax twice in error!

Thanks (1)
24th May 2017 12:55

Well just in the last week alone:

A tax code of D0 for somebody earning £30K pa. When I called, they said their computer had erroneously put in an earnings figure of £208,000 ! When I asked why, they just said "it's a glitch".

A tax code of 127T for somebody with just one normal job earning £9,000 pa. Checking the coding online, I could see they had given £9,730 of her personal allowance to another employer. Called "Income now ended" !!

And don't get me started on the missing CIS deduction of £24K that we can't get back because it's not showing up on their PAYE record.

MTD is a farce, and it will not work. Full Stop.

Thanks (7)
24th May 2017 13:45

My scoring:

1990s Revenue and Customs 8 out of 10
2009 HMRC 2 out of 10
2016 HMRC 1 out of 10

My solution:

MTD should be scrapped immediately. The resources thus freed up should instead be used on dealing with the low-hanging fruit fixes in the current system, of which there are vast orchards waiting to be picked.

Once the performance improvement of the existing system is visible - AND BEING REPORTED BY EXTERNAL people such as agents - HMRC can consider that their system is "MTD ready".

If they plough ahead with MTD before then, as I have siad before they are behaving like Captain Smith in 1912 "Icebergs, I see no icebergs."

Thanks (15)
avatar
By Spriggy
to mr. mischief
26th May 2017 10:58

I agree entirely with Mr Mischief

Thanks (1)
avatar
25th May 2017 09:36

we've definitely had the feeling over the last couple of years that HMRC are going from bad to worse

what worries me most is how they make accounting firm's look and the impact that has on client perspective.

HMRC are increasingly bypassing us as agents and going straight to the client, telling them all manner of things, which are usually wrong.

whilst we accountants are normally right and have to ask HMRC to put things right, but we've usually had an annoyed client on the phone asking why HMRC are saying things are wrong or why there's tax to pay that they didn't know about

whilst the majority of clients listen to us and accept that its HMRC errors, it plants a seed of doubt

I can't help but feel that sooner or later HMRC will cost some firms some business as some clients may choose to move on as a result of errors that they are not at fault for

Thanks (7)
avatar
to ohgoodgodno
26th May 2017 13:59

Agreed.

As you say most clients believe us and not HMRC but you have to get them to that stage - if you take on a new client and they are just starting out on the road of self-employment etc then they have very little experience of dealing with HMRC and tend to think that a large government department should be correct. After a year or so they think otherwise!!

Thanks (1)
avatar
By KateR
25th May 2017 10:36

Yes, when completing 2017 tax returns I have seen payments on account for 2016/17 being shown instead of 2017/18, after viewing the calculation page and moving on to the question 'do you want to reduce payments on account'. Have also noticed that the page for UK interest is exactly the same as last year ie boxes for 'untaxed UK interest' and 'taxed UK interest'. I thought all UK interest paid gross from April 2016. Looks as though software provider simply has not updated all changes from 2016/17 to 2017/18 and HMRC have not noticed.

Thanks (0)
to KateR
25th May 2017 11:00

Interest from banks and other deposit institutions are paid gross. Interest from companies (CT61) and other sources is still paid net of tax.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By KateR
to michaelbeaver
26th May 2017 10:46

Thanks Michael, not realised this as none of my clients get anything other than ordinary savings interest (and most of them not even that). Nothing like making the system even more complicated though.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By KateR
to michaelbeaver
30th May 2017 07:57

Since replying to your post I have looked again at the relevant section on the tax return and clicked on the 'help' button next to the Taxed UK interest box. the narrative reads "You will usually receive your interest etc after tax (at 20%) has been taken off by the payer, for example, the bank or building society....."My first thought that this section has been overlooked in the software update for 2017 seems to be correct.

Thanks (0)
25th May 2017 12:35

I had one last year which started off with an error by one of my predecessors at work. A discretionary trust had been set up in 2006, and following the death of the settlor, it was time to wind the trust up. Unfortunately, this is when I found that there was no need of trust, the subject of the trust (a commercial property) had never been settled, etc.

Trust Returns had been filed, and the requisite tax paid each year. My preliminary calculations showed that, had the "trust" income been declared by the settlor as personal, some £50,000 less tax would have been paid, and so HMRC were the winners.

After a chat with the beneficiary, we agreed to simply come clean and propose that HMRC accept a trust had been properly constituted, and we could wind up as normal. This is where it got interesting.

I found legislation in IHTA and the Trusts Act to support this position, and wrote to HMRC's dedicated Trusts unit, highlighting the error, the proposed resolution, and the appropriate legislation.

Over a period of 8 months, it was passed from pillar to post in HMRC because of "the complexity and expertise" required to bring it to a conclusion.

Eventually, I emailed Lin Homer with a full account, including the delays that had occurred. The following day I received a conference call from a senior inspector in the Trust unit and a Revenue solicitor. After a chat, we eventually had the matter settled within around four weeks, exactly as I had proposed several months previously.

It's appalling though, that sometimes you have to go right to the top to get a result, simply because the staff don't know what they are doing, even when so called specialists are involved.

Thanks (3)
avatar
By JSJ54
25th May 2017 15:06

Just phoned Employer Helpline to ask them to repay PAYE overpaid by client over last four years. Was told that HMRC can't repay it unless I told them the amount which had been overpaid. I said I wasn't prepared to read figures to him which were on his computer screen. The world has gone bl***y mad.

Thanks (2)
By Tornado
25th May 2017 17:25

"Thank you for your letter of 14/03/2017"

It is only May 25th and a letter dated 14th March has already been replied to. Unbelievable!

Thanks (2)
25th May 2017 17:57

Are you sure that was not a typo and it was not 2016?

Thanks (2)
avatar
26th May 2017 10:07

I have to say that not all the staff in my firm are perfect. However they don't answer the phone and give advice.

HMRC are perhaps underfunded or the staff under trained.

The Government are trying to make ends meet so cutbacks cause this.

We either all pay more tax and send HMRC staff on courses or we put up with this.

Thanks (1)
avatar
By Echo761
to lordburnside
26th May 2017 10:31

I agree initially I had some sympathy for HMRC staff who were under trained, under pressure and underpaid.... until having a chat with some of my ex HMRC colleagues (they are still at HMRC) I found that people no longer look forward to pay increases.... they get promoted instead. I was flabbergasted (real word?) to hear of the vast swathes of HMRC staff (some of whom could not lace their own boots..) who had been promoted and very rapidly into well paid jobs. Not on the basis of superb performance but on the basis that HMRC were in such disarray that they had to fill gaps and this was the easiest way. Un bell eve able.

Thanks (1)
avatar
26th May 2017 10:08

My client has just had a closure letter for a year that wasn't under enquiry and they've overcharged him by £552 in their calculation - having decided 2 short PAYE engagements were missing from his return, they've added both incomes and deducted one of the tax deductions only
They have now referred to technical to re-open the enquiry, correct it and then reclose it - for the right year.
Shambolic is what they are!!
I just tried to retrieve and pre-populate a return for another client with employment income - which I know has been submitted as we do the payroll and did all the year end stuff weeks ago - no information available - but let's drive on blindly with MTD!!!

Thanks (1)
avatar
26th May 2017 10:23

I have a client whose tax affairs were completely messed up by HMRC. I explained, twice, in a call to the Agent's helpline what needed amendment and would generate a refund for my client, and later received a call from the officer dealing with the issue. He clearly didn't understand, so I went through the facts a third time. The officer then issued an amendment to the calculation which was wrong! In order to bring this sorry matter to a close, I did the entire calculations myself and sent a hard copy to the office/officer dealing with my client's affairs.

At last, the amendment required was made.
But I had spent a considerable amount of time, and therefore went through the process of billing my client, getting him to pay the fee, and then pursuing HMRC for a refund of these. The officer who had issued the incorrect amendment reviewed and rejected the claim on the grounds that it was excessive. I asked for it to be reviewed. It was, but by the officer's colleague, who sat next to him and had often answered the phone when I had called to track progress! He too rejected it on the same grounds.

I then obtained, under DPA 1998 a copy of all the phone calls I had made and the information I had provided. I resubmitted the claim along with copies of the DPA 1998 information obtained, justifying the total time spent, and asked for it to be reviewed by a higher grade officer or one who had had no dealings with me.

Two weeks later I received a very conciliatory phone call from a different officer at HMRC who told me the claim had been approved in full.

Unfortunately, chasing the claim had cost me almost as much time as had formed the basis of the claim!

Thanks (2)
avatar
By SXGuy
26th May 2017 10:21

Client received an envelope with 2 different letters showing 2 different tax codes both dated the same day.

I myself last year submitted my tax return by paper to be sent a statement missing a zero off the end of my profit making me liable for no tax. I submitted it again this time online and still it showed I owed nothing. Seems man and machine can not add up equally.

Thanks (0)
avatar
26th May 2017 10:22

I am a Pension Scheme Administrator. I had a particularly thorny question, and having scoured the Pensions Tax Manual without success, I decided to call the HMRC Pension Schemes telephone.
After waiting on the line for the usual 20+ minutes for someone to answer I got through to a pleasant operative who listened politely to my question and then said "Oh no, I can't answer that - you'll need to speak to someone who knows about pensions"

Thanks (1)
avatar
to bruce.davey
26th May 2017 10:43

I think we all have long lists of these types of issues which crop up time and again, but it's the future that really worries me and MTD in particular. Our software provider (Iris) recently sent us an email to say the automatic link to HMRC software had now been enabled which brings in the data already held by HMRC into our tax software preparatory for MTD. Almost immediately, we received a second email telling us to disable the link because of the problems it was causing which were wholly due to errors in HMRC's software. This comes after the fiasco of the Marriage Allowance, Class 2 NI and tax calculations for 2016/17 and we are expected to make huge investments in time and money to make MTD successful when we have no faith in HMRC software or the people implementing the changes. I understand there has been a rush of firms being placed on the market for sale ahead of MTD and I can well understand this, but it is depressing sale values as a result. I don't believe HMRC have a clue about the impact MTD is having on accountants, or their clients, and they just don't care and are blindly continuing with their digital mission, despite the mounting evidence and parliamentary criticism that is being introduced too quickly and without proper testing. As usual, it will take a huge effort on our part to make it work, if at all.

Sorry, rant over, but I now feel marginally better, although probably not for long before another issue crops up....

Thanks (1)
avatar
By jmlusby
26th May 2017 10:29

For the first six weeks of the 2017/18 tax year the HMRC system did not allow for the underpaid tax from 2016/17 tax returns to be allocated to the 2018/19 tax code. I had to sit on about 10 tax returns because I couldn't submit them.

Apparently due to a technical glitch in the system when the data was transferred over - not very helpful!

Thanks (0)
avatar
26th May 2017 10:30

I'm still waiting for a reply to a letter sent on 28th February 2016, yes 2016. This is despite it being raised as an official complaint with promises of immediate action and further follows up since then.

Last week my wife got a notice to complete a Self Assessment Tax for 5th April 2017, despite it being filed on 1st May. There is obviously no link to prevent this waste of paper. And on the topic of missing links, I still get P800's when people are in self assessment.

We do have a complex tax system, but why should it be accountants who get it right and HMRC who are always one or more steps behind?

Thanks (0)
avatar
to raybackler
26th May 2017 11:09

Ha, I've filed about 30 returns (CIS refunds) all of which clients (ALL) had notices to complete a tax return 2 weeks after the returns had been filed electronically. 4 already had their refunds. Date on the letter 6th April. etc. etc.

Thanks (0)
avatar
to raybackler
26th May 2017 12:09

This works both ways. My 2017 SA316 notice to file was dated as issued on 6 April 2017.
I received it in the post delivered early in the afternoon of 6 April 2017.

I wonder whether this was evidence of a brilliantly efficient postal service or of post dating of HMRC correspondence.

In contrast, the equivalent form dated 5 April 2016 was not delivered to me until the end of May 2016.

Thanks (0)
avatar
to leon0001
26th May 2017 12:19

Is that why spag bol tastes different in Italy than it does in Italian restaurants.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By RogerMT
26th May 2017 10:31

We all have our stories to tell, but you can't really blame the frontline officers, when the real reason for HMRC's sinking into a broiling sea of incompetence and inefficiency is simply a long-term and chronic lack of funding, particularly in the current decade. This leads to understaffing, and lack of basic training, which results in the horror stories we all have experience of.
One suspects after June 8th it isn't going to get any better as our wonderful blue rulers continue to dismantle the country apace. Sad times.

Thanks (4)
avatar
to RogerMT
26th May 2017 14:48

I am not an accountant, but surely the obvious answer is not underfunding or any of those sorts of excuses.

The true answer and root of all these issues is the totally unnecessary complexity of our tax system.

Simplify the whole system, with the myriad of allowances, reliefs, nuances, interpretations etc etc and you remove almost all these mistakes because it is far simpler to administer and get right.

Thanks (2)
avatar
By booksy
to dsassoon
27th May 2017 13:37

Tax by it's very nature is complex. Perhaps you would like heart surgery to be simplified as well? Tax needs to be complex to deal fairly with different situations and circumstances. Once size fits all approach is a true copout and a dangerous one.

Thanks (1)
avatar
to booksy
27th May 2017 13:47

Of course there is a complexity in the tax system. The point that is being made in this thread is that if HMRC cannot cope with their own system what hope is there.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By booksy
to david wilks
28th May 2017 07:53

?

Thanks (0)
avatar
to booksy
27th May 2017 13:47

Of course there is a complexity in the tax system. The point that is being made in this thread is that if HMRC cannot cope with their own system what hope is there.

Thanks (0)
By DJKL
to booksy
30th May 2017 10:18

Tax is complex as it currently stands but that does not mean it always has to be so, simplification in some areas is possible.

If there was a distinct tax for smaller business entities, with its own very simplified rules and process, then the vast swathe by volume of transactions with HMRC, currently generated by smaller business entities, could be routed via bespoke units only dealing with this new regime.

The tricky bits could be left for larger business entities, such an approach might limit necessary staff training.

Similarly I could chop a fair bit out of the legislation by say scrapping IHT and introducing CGT on death instead, including on family homes-it would also possibly raise far more tax than IHT and would certainly be fairer on those whose wealth is not predicated on pregnant gains washed out on death.

The current regime has say saving in a bank where all growth (What growth one might say) is taxed as you go whereas buy a property and hold to death and in a large number of cases no tax is ever due on the untaxed gain.

I would get to scrap all the bits of legislation about PPR but add a few pages to allow for reinvestment relief re one's PPR and inter spousal relief to ensure tax only falls due on sale with no reinvestment or on second death ; I can basically take Sweden's tax code re this and hire a translator.

I do appreciate tax will always have some complexity but not all of it is necessary.

Thanks (0)
avatar
26th May 2017 10:38

Rebecca,

I want to know what can be done about the appalling decline in HMRC service? It truly is appalling. Yesterday a client received a letter from Debt Management telling him he owed £1,186 (PAYE) and that legal proceedings were to begin. His PAYE account is in credit and this is stated on his ONLINE HMRC BUSINESS TAX ACCOUNT!
When I contacted HMRC, the madness continued - I stated my client's HMRC account was in credit and the operator asked me to tell him the figures I was reading as his system did not allow him to view the information. How can this be allowed to happen?
Meanwhile we are all wasting valuable non chargeable time, chasing HMRC to correct their errors and dealing with angry taxpayers!
This is just one example of many errors and corrections I have had to deal with over the last 2 years, but the problem being, the errors and service are both getting worse not better.
Something must be done. There must be pressure applied politically and by the accountancy profession at the highest level!
These are the people who will manage MTD! It will be a shambles!

Thanks (1)
avatar
to amckillop
26th May 2017 12:17

One of our clients recently received a solicitor's letter threatening legal proceedings if £7000 odd of PAYE was not paid in seven days.
We spent an age on the phone to the Employer help line and ascertained that the were "unresolved credits" and only some £1,400 was late.
The next correspondence received mentioned a £1,500 overpayment and the next PAYE payment should be reduced accordingly.
So far as we are aware, our client's payments have always been exactly in line with the amounts we submit under RTI.

The time being wasted is phenomenal.

Thanks (1)
avatar
to amckillop
27th May 2017 20:13

One answer would be to log and time every unnecessary call, letter and client contact. Then charge HMRC for this, obviously via the client, as the law requires.

If every agent did this, HMRC would soon smarten up their act.....or am I being too optimistic.

Unfortunately, when HMRC pays it is the taxpayers' money and the person or persons responsible escape unscathed!

Thanks (0)
avatar
to sammerchant
27th May 2017 21:06

Way too optimistic!

Thanks (0)
avatar
26th May 2017 10:39

I telephoned HMRC in April, when I was completing my own return, to let them know that the payments on account were showing as 2016/17 instead of 2017/18. I suggested that they needed to correct it PDQ. I can't have been the only one to contact them. It's very worrying that a month later nothing has been done to correct this.
It is very concerning with MTD fast approaching.

Thanks (0)
26th May 2017 10:40

A client of ours set up a separate business as an LLP which was closed down, including giving notice that the PAYE scheme ceased, in 2015. A couple of weeks ago they received a demand for about £8K for overdue PAYE, all of which were estimated amounts, because HMRC had re-opened the scheme by mistake. They wouldn't talk to me at first because we were no longer the agent (we de-registered when the LLP was struck off) so I had to get one of the ex-partners to phone to give them permission. I then phoned back (these calls were all about 15 minutes before we got to speak to a human - why isn't there an agent dedicated line for PAYE?) I had to phone back a second time and got into this weird loop where the HMRC guy said firstly that the previous 'temporary permission' (which he could see) was only valid for one call. He asked me if I was their current agent and I said that strictly speaking I wasn't because the LLP no longer existed, although I was the agent for all 5 of the ex-partners in the LLP. In that case, he said, he can't discuss anything with me unless one of the members (who of course are no longer partners!) phoned to renew my temporary permission. I really do understand that they need authorisation but they also need brains - he could see that there was an unresolved minor issue from the previous call that required follow up from our side.

And PLEASE give us agent-dedicated lines for all the taxes - we don't have the time to waste on the public lines sorting out HMRC screw-ups for them.

Whilst I'm on that subject, when I've pressed whatever to say I'm calling as an agent please don't waste further time playing recordings about what I can find on their web site.

Thanks (5)
to miketombs
26th May 2017 13:53

if the LLP is dissolved, just send the demands back to HMRC "LLP no longer exists - dissolved on [date]" and let them get on with it.

Thanks (0)
to tonyaustin
26th May 2017 17:02

tonyaustin wrote:

if the LLP is dissolved, just send the demands back to HMRC "LLP no longer exists - dissolved on [date]" and let them get on with it.

Whilst a separate legal entity like a company, an LLP is treated as a partnership for most tax purposes. I wouldn't like to guarantee that the dissolution of the LLP leaves the partners in the clear on this one in the same way it would if it was a company.
Thanks (0)
avatar
26th May 2017 10:45

And they have the gall to now regard all mistakes made by a taxpayer as "careless".
A client of mine made an innocent error regarding CIS. He has been hounded left, right and centre by HMRC notwithstanding that the subcontractor has declared the gross income he received and paid tax on it. HMRC want my client to cough up the cis tax he should have deducted, thereby getting the tax twice.
The jobsworth clown from HMRC I spoke with would have none of it and obviously kept reading from a script banging on about contractors' duties etc, etc.
This is after my writing HMRC in March suggesting that Regulation 9(5) be invoked and not receiving a reply.
It is, in the main, not the taxpayer who is being careless it is firmly HMRC who effectively "couldn't care less".

Thanks (0)
avatar
26th May 2017 10:55

At the risk of you all shouting at me, I think the root cause of this problem has to be considered. For years and years, HMRC failed to recruit staff and now, experienced staff are leaving either through retirement or because offices are closing and they are unable to travel within reasonable daily travelling distance to the nearest regional hub. Staff are now being recruited in quite some number to plug the gap but they are inexperienced (some as young as 17 on the helpline for example) and there are too few experienced staff to mentor them. The training offered to these inexperienced staff consists of computer based training which does not give enough detail around functionality of RTI systems etc... all in all a perfect storm. At the risk of more people shouting at me, I often wonder if this situation is being engineered by the current government who appear desperate to fully privatise HMRC ...

Thanks (4)
avatar
By RogerMT
to glynnieb
26th May 2017 11:09

Well, I won't be shouting at you, as your post expands on mine from further up the thread. Agree with you 100%. I have an old friend who works for HMRC at mid-management level, and she would back up everything you say, and then some. As I said in my post, sad times...

Thanks (1)
avatar
to RogerMT
26th May 2017 14:53

Sorry Roger, I missed your earlier comment. I agree very sad times indeed. As an example to illustrate the issue ;my friends son (21 years old - the son not the friend :-) ) has just started working at HMRC, he along with his fellow new starters had a weeks training on dealing with bereavement cases and they then put them to deal with bereavement calls on the national helpline. Because these kids (as most of them are) are working till 8pm there is no support available for them if they get stuck on a query and the "advice" they are given is to tell the caller to ring back in the morning!

Thanks (0)
avatar
to RogerMT
26th May 2017 14:56

deleted as duplicate post

Thanks (0)
to glynnieb
26th May 2017 12:49

No reason to shout at you for stating what is almost certainly true.

No less frustrating for us all to have to deal with of course whatever the reason.

Thanks (1)
By DJKL
to glynnieb
30th May 2017 10:27

Well, if they are going to privatise HMRC I am all for the idea given the stunning results we have seen re contractors running some prisons or ferrying prisoners to/from court.

Maybe the contractor running the new service could lose my tax record and I will never have to pay tax again, a sort of reverse national lottery-it could be you.

Thanks (1)

Pages